CONCEPTS AND FORMS OF SOCIAL MOBILITY By social mobility is meant any transition from one social position to another.

Change in social position involves generally significant change in life-chances and life styles. According to Pitirim A. Sorokin, the shift of position may be undertaken by an individual or social object or value. That is to say, anything that has been created or modified by human activity can experience social mobility. Any change of position in society experienced by an individual or a group has its impact not only on the individual or the group, but also on the society at large. TYPES OF MOBILITY 1. Horizontal Mobility- Horizontal social mobility means movement by individuals or groups from one position to another in society which does not involve a shift into a higher or lower stratum. According to Soorokin, horizontal social mobility means the transition of an individual or social object from one social group to another situated on the same level. 2. Vertical Mobility- An upward or downward change in the rank of an individual or group. It is important to remember that some movements may be both horizontal and vertical at the same time. P. Sorokin defines Vertical Social Mobility as the relations involved in a transition of an individual (or a social object) from one social stratum to another. According to the direction of the transition there are two types of vertical social mobility: ascending and descending, or 'social climbing' and 'social sinking' respectively. Forms of MobilityDrawing evidences from the American society P. Sorokin states that, both the ascending and descending currents of economic, political and occupational mobility exists in two principal forms. They exist as: i. ii. an infiltration of the individuals of a lower stratum into an existing higher one; and a creation of a new group by such individuals, and the insertion of such a group into a higher stratum instead of, or side by side with, the existing groups of this stratum.

Correspondingly, the descending or downward mobility has also two principal form as: i. ii. dropping of individuals from a higher social position into an existing lower one, without a degradation or disintegration of the higher group to which they belonged; and degradation of a social group as a whole, in an abasement of its rank among other groups, or in its disintegration as a social unit.

Ralph Turner has suggested two ideal-typical normative patterns of upward mobility. They are: i. Contest Mobility is a system in which elite status is the prize in a open contest and is taken by the aspirants on efforts. Since the "prize" of successful upward mobility is not in the

ii.

hands of a established elite to give out, the latter cannot determine who shall attain it and who shall not. Sponsored Mobility is one where the established elite or their agents recruit individuals into their fold. In this case elite status is given on the basis of some criterion of supposed merit and cannot be taken by any amount of effort or strategy.

DIMENSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF MOBILITY i. Intra-generational Mobility and Intergenerational Mobility- Intra-generational mobility is also called popularly as career mobility. Studying the American occupational structure, Blau and Duncan have found that a person's chances of moving up the occupational ladder are strongly influenced by. a) Amount of Education b) The nature of the person's first job c) Father's occupation

One of the first major studies on inter-generational mobility was conducted in England and Wales by David Glass in 1949. It was found that intergenerational mobility was quite high and about two-third of the persons interviewed were in a different occupational category from that of their father. Another significant study was conducted in Western Europe and U.S. It was found that cross-class mobility was about 30% for all western industrial societies and that most of the mobility was short range. Less obvious factors also play a part in occupational attainment. Small families can give each child more resources, attention and encouragement. Those who postpone marriage are more likely to succeed than those who many early, Willingness to postpone marriage may be a sign of an underlying personality trait, etc. ii. Range of Mobility- When people move up or down the social scale, they may travel through one or many strata. The social distance thus covered is denoted by the term 'range'. It could be movement covering a short social distance, i.e., short-range shift. Also, a big slide across a number of strata (up or down) is also possible. This is a case of long-range mobility. For example, when Blau and Duncan collected information on a national sample of 20,000 males, they concluded that there is much vertical mobility in the United States. Interestingly, nearly all of this is between occupational positions quite close to one another. 'Long-Range' mobility is rare. On the contrary, Frank Parkin stresses on instances of 'longrange' mobility. Downward Mobility- Anthony Giddens proposes that, although downward mobility is less common than upward mobility, it is still a widespread phenomenon. According to his findings, over 20 percent of men in the UK are downwardly mobile inter-generationally although most of this movement is short-range. Downward intra-generational mobility is also common. This trend is most often linked up with psychological problems and anxieties, where individuals fail to sustain the life-styles to which they have become accustomed. Redundancy can also be the cause of downward mobility. Middle-aged men who lose their

iii.

jobs, for example, find it hard to gain new employment at all, or can only obtain work at a lower level of income than before. In terms of intra-generational mobility at any rate, many of the downwardly mobile are women. It is so, as many women abandon their promising careers on the birth of a child. After spending some years bringing up a family, such women return to the paid work force at a later date, often at a lower level than that at which they left. iv. Upward Mobility- Acquiring wealth and property is the major means of moving up in modem societies, but other channels are also there. Entering an occupation with honor (Judge etc.), receiving a doctorate degree, or marrying into an aristocratic family are a few such channels. Popularly it is being held that, the family serves as that social unit through which an individual is placed into the class structure of a society. Important here to note that imitations of higher class life-styles and behavior (at times crude, or otherwise) have also served as useful means of upward mobility in traditional as well as in modem societies. Possibilities of Mobility- Mobility is not possible if a society is rigid enough to allow any movement within its graded structure. On the other hand, mobility is facilitated if a society exhibits flexible character. Very little vertical mobility is possible in a closed society. Premodem Colombia and India more or less approximate such type. In contrast, an open society allows for greater vertical social mobility. However, even in open societies people cannot move from one stratum to another without resistance. Every society has established criteria - which might be proper manners, family lineage, education, or racial affiliation etc., which must satisfied before people can move to a higher social level. Comparative Social Mobility- Frank Parkin made a subtle, yet a substantive study to throw new light on social mobility. He sought out data from erstwhile communist run societies of eastern Europe and attempted some comparison. the dominant class of managers and professionals, like such classes in capitalist societies, is able to transmit competitive advantage to their own children, and the privileged classes assure high position for their children, there is nevertheless much social mobility for peasants and manual workers in these societies.

v.

vi.

a. b.

Parkin cited a study of Hungary to show that 77% of managerial, administrative, and professional positions were filler by men and women of peasant and worker origin, and that 53% of doctors, scientist and engineers were from such families. The increase in white-collar positions as a consequence of industrial expansion had provided in Eastern Europe a level of mobility for those lower in occupational rank that exceeds that in the United states and Europe. This fact instilled higher aspirations among the working classes. These studies indicate that social mobility - its possibilities and implications, are all being connected to specific social contexts. MODERN ANALYSES OF SOCIAL MOBILITY

i.

'Liberal Theory' of Industrialism-'The main tenet of the 'Liberal Theory' is that there are certain defining pre-requisites for, and necessary consequences of industry impacting upon any society. Accordingly, mobility trends in industrial societies, in comparison with pre-industrial one are: a. absolute rates of social mobility are generally high, and moreover upward mobility i.e., from less to more advantaged positions predominates over downward mobility; b. relative rates of mobility of that is, mobility opportunities are more equal, in the sense that individuals of differing social origins compete on more equal terms; and c. both the level of absolute rates of mobility and the degree of equally in relative rates tend to increase over time.

P.M. Blau and O.D. Duncan (1967) are among those leading sociologists who hinted upon the above scenario. The arguments for such a conclusion are: a. Within industrial society the dynamism of a rationality developed technology demands continuous, and often rapid, change in the structure of the social division of labor. The structure of division of labor itself gets more differentiated with more specialized jobs. High values of mobility thus follow as from generation to generation, as well as in the course of individual life times. b. Industrialism transforms the very basis of selection and allocation of particular individuals to different position within the division of labor. Instead of occupation, achievement orientation suits the rational procedures of selection. Moreover, the growing demand for highly qualified personnel promotes the expansion of education and training, and also the reform of educational institutions so as to increase their accessibility to individuals of all social backgrounds; and c. The new modes of selection will suit the new sectors of economy - that is, the more technologically advanced manufacturing industries and services, and also within the increasingly dominant form of large-scale bureaucratic organization. So, areas of economy which are resistant to the industrial way of life get marginalized and achievement oriented mobility pervade the expanding areas of economy. ii. Lipset and Zetterberg's Theory- According of them, among industrial societies no association is apparent between mobility rates and rate of economic growth. Social mobility of societies becomes relatively high once their industrialization reaches a certain level. Also they do not consider the high mobility of industrial societies as the result of a tendency towards greater openness. High mobility is then primarily due to effects of structural change of these societies. Lipset and Zetterberg's central hypothesis is that rates of social mobility display a basic similarity across industrial societies.

The study of nine European countries conducted by Robert Erickson and John Goldlthorpe too refuted the 'liberal theory' of industrialism. They studies both western and eastern European societies-and found no evidence of general and abiding trends towards either higher level of total mobility or of social fluidity within the nations. They did not find any evidence that mobility rates, whether absolute or relative, are changing in any other consistent direction; nor again evidence that such rates show a tendency over time to become cross-nationally more similar.

SOCIAL MOBILITY IN CASTE AND CLASS Caste system is often associated with 'closed society' where avenues for mobility rare, restricted and few. Classes are found in 'open' societies which often-ample opportunities for mobility through achievement. MOBILITY IN CASTE While the general impression has been that caste is a 'closed' system of stratification, yet in reality it is far from true. No society is static and even in the traditional set up where ascription was the prime determinant of one's ritual and occupational standing, access to rewards and resources and social mobility both upward and downward was not totally absent. Social mobility in the caste system is evident in the increasing discrepancy between caste Social Mobility in Caste and Class and occupations, withering away of jajmani obligations, the rigidity regarding purity and pollution and acceptance of secular lifestyle. In the olden days, there were two major sources of mobility. First was the fluidity of the political system, which made it feasible for new castes to assume the status of Kshatriyas and exercise power. Second was the availability of marginal land which could be brought under cultivation. As a consequence of these two available routes to upward mobility, leaders from dominant castes such as Reddis, Marathas could seize political power and claim Kshatriyas status. The medieval Pala dynasty of Bengal was Shudra in origin. The Patridars of Gujarat originated as peasant caste. When the leader of a dominant caste escalated the rank of raja or king, it became a source of mobility for the other members and this was strengthened by adoption of practices and life styles of the upper castes. Level of Mobility- Mobility has taken place at the level of individual, family and group. i. Mobility of an, Individual within a family: Some individuals even though of low caste, may get better status and prestige compared to other members of their family. This may be on account of one's personality traits such as integrity, honesty, acquisition of education and other achievements. Similarly an individual of higher may lose his position on account of misdeeds and slothful habits. This may result in downward mobility for the individual. The individual mobility is therefore a consequence of the individual's capabilities or lack of it and hence does not influence the prestige of the caste and is least corporate in nature. Mobility of a minority of families within a caste: This kind of mobility is linked to socioeconomic and political aspects of the families. The improvement in status could be result of acquisition of land and education which is further reiterated by emulating the practices of higher caste with regard to dress, lifestyle and rituals. Mobility of this type is not cooperate in nature and can be viewed as 'horizontal mobility' rather than 'vertical mobility' which bridges the gap between status distinctions. Burton Stein points out that this trend was predominant in medieval period. Mobility of a majority of family or group: This kind of mobility is 'corporate' in nature. It involves collective state at prestige, honor, status and is therefore marked by changes in socio-cultural practices regarding purity and pollution. Certain castes improve their positions by discarding practices regarded impure and degrading. Sanskritization was the chief

ii.

iii.

process which helped these castes to move up in hierarchy and legitimize their claim to the upward mobility. Sanskritization- M.N. Srinivas formulated and contributed immensely to the concept of Sanskritization as a process of mobility in caste. He refers to Sanskritization as a "process by which a now hindu caste or tribal or other groups, changes its customs, ritual ideology and way of life in direction of a high and frequently 'twice born' castes". It has been used as mechanism to bridge the gap between secular and ritual rank. Whenever a caste achieved secular power it tried to legitimize its status by acquiring traditional symbols of high castes by adopting their customs, rituals beliefs and ideas such as vegetarianism and teetotalism. Another very significant pattern of Sanskritization involved increasing Puritanism on the part of the castes that rejected superiority of the twice born e.g. the Koris of eastern Uttar Pradesh refused to accept water from Brahmins. Such a process of de-sanskritization contributes to crystallization of new groups and greater political mobilization. Re-sanskritization is another process in the Endeavour to attain mobility. In this case formerly westernized or modernized groups discard many symbols of modernization and revert to traditional sanskritic life styles. Westernization is a vast, multidimensional and a complex process which impinged upon various domains through a member of institutions and hence had a significant bearing on caste mobility. It not only altered the existing set up but also opened fresh avenues and doors for social mobility. A large number of inter-related factors are responsible for this.

SECULARIZATION- The term "secularization" implies that what was previously regarded as religious ceases to be such and it also implies a process of differentiation in the various aspects of society, economy, polity, laws and morality becoming increasingly discrete in relation to each other. In the traditional set up the principle of purity and pollution was the prime determinant of the status, ranking, occupation and the general lifestyle. With increasing emphasis on rationality and education the notion of purity pollution weakened and today it is common to see people of different castes work together in factories or rub shoulders against each other in buses and trains and even dine together in restaurants. Together with this, the manner of dress in the modem society serves to blue caste distinctions. The new law based on universalism and the constitutional recognition of equality for all citizens and the declaration of India as a secular state has served to abolish discrimination based on caste. i. Education - Acquisition of education opened avenues for individual and group mobility. Those trained in modem education could find jobs in army and bureaucracy which gave impetus to upward mobility. Besides this education instilled the minds of people with new principles of the justice, liberty and equality. The educated elite fought against discriminations on the basis of caste. SC's and OBC's

ii.

iii.

Industrialization and Urbanization

Significance of Class Mobility- The extent of mobility has been used as a measure of the "openness" of industrial society and high mobility rates are an indication of the society being characterized by achievement rather than ascription and that it is meritocratic where individuals reap regards on the basis of their personal qualities rather than through inherited wealth and positions. Class mobility is a crucial factor for the understanding of class formation. Also, study of class mobility can provide indications of life chances of the members of society i.e. the impact of one's class of origin on life chances. Besides this, the responses and reactions of the those undergoing mobility are important for analyzing social stability and expansion. Class Mobility and Class Formation- Karl Marx was concerned about the relationship between class formation and action on one hand and the extend of mobility between class positions on the other. Marx recognized that a certain degree of immobility is seen as indispensable prerequisite for the emergence of class consciousness. Similarly, Weber too emphasized on the significance of social mobility for class formation. Weber recognized immobility as a chief determinant for social and cultural identity of a class. Westergaard and Resler reiterate the crucial part played in shaping of class structure as a whole by the division, between those who own the capital and those who do not. They also recognise the importance of mobility and lack of it as a factor influencing peoples responses to their class situation, class consciousness and class organization. Like Westergaard and Resler, Giddens too visualizes mobility as process of central importance to class formation. But for Giddens, its importance lies not only in the development of class consciousness and organization as classes for themselves, it also extends back as recognizable social phenomena i.e. as 'classes in themselves'. Giddens is of the opinion that greater the restrictions on mobility i.e. greater the immobility, greater the chances for formation of distinct identifiable classes in terms of reproduction of life chances, cohesion and class solidarity. Mobility is a basic source of class 'structuration' i.e. it is the rate and pattern of mobility that will determine the extent to which classes may be recognized as collectivities of individual or families occupying similar locations. Secondly, the extent of mobility may be taken as significant indicator for prevailing modes of class action. Industrialization and Mobility In the analysis of mobility processes and patterns that term class in not used strictly in the sense used by Marx or by Weber. Rather class is viewed in terms of occupational groupings because occupation is an aspect of one's merit, education and qualifications and it determines one's status, prestige and salary which is turn influences the consumption patterns and life chances. Industrialization has introduced a lot of changes not only in the economic sphere but in all realms of society. Industrial societies are referred to as 'open' societies where the opportunities for mobility are available in plenty. The high rates of

mobility in industrial societies is attributed to rapid economic change which necessitates occupational geographical and social mobility to make optimum and efficient use of available talent. It is on this account that Lipset and Zettergerg feel that industrialism creates uniform mobility patterns. Duncan and Blua emphasize on a number of factors generated by industrialization that have a bearing on mobility patterns. They are of the opinion that industrialization is connected with growing rationalism which accounts for universalistic criteria for selection and upgrading occupational division of labor, weakening of Kinship and neighborhood ties. The emphasis on achievement as a criteria for selection in industrialization has generated both upward and downward mobility. While it is clear that upward mobility is the result of the recognition given to merit, downward mobility is the result of lack of inheritable positions of the elites. Education and Mobility Education has attained a key role in facilitating mobility especially in the industrial societies. The increasing specialization and division of labor presuppose the existence of qualified personnel who can handle specialized tasks. These specialists whether in the field of industry laws, or medicine are trained and educated in specialized branches of knowledge. These educational and training facilities are open to all in the industrial societies. In the traditional set up, it was imparted to a very small number of people in the guilds which then restricted mobility. Education has been used as a route to attain upward mobility. Educational attainment is a major determinant of career mobility and deeply affects the patterns of inter-generational and intragenerational mobility. Qualifications have a bearing on mobility patterns. manual workers entered in manual jobs while those of non-manual workers entered manual jobs. According to Lipset and Bendix, poverty, lack of education, lack of exposure are other factors that affect mobility. SOCIAL MOBILITY AND CLASSES IN INDIA In the present set up classes and castes have co-existed as dynamic systems and have interacted to create a complex and multi-dimensional empirical reality. During the British rule land became a saleable commodity and it had serious repercussion on the nature of agrarian relations and on socio mobility. Social mobility in agrarian classes- The introduction of land reforms in the 1950 which aimed at abolishing the intermediaries, such as the Zamindars and providing land to the tiller generated vertical mobility - both upward and downward. While some tenants could buy surplus land and become upwardly mobile, others were throw out by the Zamindars who claimed to be the cultivators. This resulted in the pauperization of the landless laborers, land reforms were also a source of downward

mobility for the Zamindars. They lost their right to extract taxes and share from the cultivators which was a source of their wealth. They were left with fragmented holdings which could not support their feudal lifestyle. With the introduction of legal measures such as introduction of panchayats and universal adult franchise, they felt uncomfortable for their influence and power waned. Green Revolution program launched by the government in 1960's has also altered the pattern of inequalities in the villages. The emphasis of this program was on the use of High Yielding variety seeds and use of fertilizers for increasing productivity. But these seeds and fertilizers also required other basic infrastructural facilities such as tube wells for regular water supply. These along with other requirements cannot be afforded by small peasants. A new class of 'Progressive Farmers' have come to characterize the villages under the Green Revolution Program. They have large land holdings and can afford to invest in resources like tractors, pump sets, power threshers etc. These progressive farmers are entrepreneurs who invest in land to reap profits. They are a distinct class who are separated from the small farmers and from the agricultural labor whom they employ Green revolution has thus further reinforced social inequality. The increasing prosperity of the rich landlords at the cost of pauperization of the workers has generated conflict and strife in the agrarian set up. Political mobilization of the agrarian classes on an all India basis started during the freedom struggle. This continues even today, although the spread and intensity of mobilization varies across regions, classes and time periods. It is now clear that a large number of processes have influenced the nature of agrarian classes and mobility among them. They have been measures and mechanism for the formation of new castes and the upward and downward mobility of the existing ones. Social Mobility in Urban Classes- Urbanization is not a new phenomena for Indian society. During the pre-British period, there were a large number of cities with a district pattern of ranking and administration. After industrialization, the resultant urban ward migration has been rapid and enormous. This has grossly affected the nature of the social classes. There we four major classes that can be identified in an urban set up. These include: i. ii. iii. iv. The capitalists/bourgeoisie Entrepreneurs Traders and Shopkeepers Professional Classes Working Class FACTORS AND FORCES OF SOCIAL MOBILITY The study of social mobility cannot be separated from social placement or recruitment. While it is true that social mobility has existed in all societies, even the most 'closed' societies such as the caste system in India. Industrialization has significantly increased the rates of social mobility. One of the-pioneers in the study of social mobility is the Russian sociologist, Sorokin. According to him, there are certain primary factors that affect mobility in all societies, and secondary factors that are

specific to particular societies at particular times. He argued that no society can be regarded as completely closed, denying any mobility, nor can it be completely open, as there are always barriers to mobility. He listed four primary factorsi. ii. iii. iv. the demographic factor, the abilities of parents and children, the faulty distribution of individuals in social positions, and most importantly, the change of the environment.

Elite Theories- Talent and ability as the main reason for why individuals come to occupy certain positions was the chief argument of Vilfredo Pareto, one of the elite theorists. He contended that over time generations lose their innate qualities, or persons from lower strata might exhibit those qualities, and thus a change in the personnel of the elite would take place. This was his famous theory of the circulation of elites. This circulation in Pareto's theory was of two types. In the first, talented individuals from lower strata enter higher strata. At other times, when the abilities of higher groups are called into question, it is likely that groups from lower strata challenge and overthrow the supremacy of such groups. In other words, both individual and group mobility is possible. Max Gluckman has referred to this as 'repetitive change', in the context of changes in African chiefdoms. Of course, it may also happen that such a change does not take place within the confines of a given system, but ends in changing the system itself. Maurice Duverger has preferred to this as the difference between conflicts 'within the regime' and conflicts ' over the regime.' Industrialization and Mobility- Much of the theorizing on mobility has been concerned with the relationship of industrialization with social mobility. One of the leading arguments in this field, associated with Lipset and Bendix is that industrialization leads to an increase in mobility over pre industrial rates, and that once all societies have reached a certain level of industrialization, there is a similarity in their rates of social mobility. A different but related thesis is the Convergence thesis, which has been propounded by Kerr and others, that all industrial societies converge towards a common pattern of mobility among other things, like overall patterns of stratification. In a famous comparative study of a number of European countries and the USA, Lipset and Bendix sought to test two main hypotheses. First, that once all societies have reached a certain level of industrialization, they experience higher rates of mobility than pre industrial societies, Second, the common perception that the USA offers significantly greater opportunities for mobility than the countries of Europe.

Their data confirmed the first hypothesis but not the second. Lipset and Bendix, list five main points, the factors of social mobility in industrial societies. These are: i. ii. iii. iv. v. Changes in the number of available vacancies Different rates of fertility Changes in the rank accorded to occupations Changes in the number of inheritable status positions Changes in legal restrictions pertaining to potential opportunities.

The Convergence Hypothesis- A well known and much debated hypothesis regarding the relationship of industrialization and stratification is the Convergence Hypothesis. This was most clearly articulated by Kerr and others who stated that in today's world, the fact of industrialization was a common denominator which would impel all industrialized societies towards a common future society which they called a pluralistic industrialist society. These societies would have common patterns of stratification as well as common patterns of mobility. Mobility would be high, as the demands of industrialization would necessitate the free and easy movement of persons from one position to another. This was a functionalist argument in one sense. They also implied that there would be a continuous increase in mobility rate, over time. The argument of Kerr and others has been comprehensively criticized by Goldthorpe. He cities the work of Miller, who, using more data than Lipset and Bendix, shows that in fact there is a lack of convergence between the rates of mobility of industrial societies. DOWNWARD MOBILITY- Downward mobility can occur because certain occupations have lost in prestige through a re-ranking of positions, and thus their occupants have moved down. In a number of cases however, it may not merely be a case of demotion, but rather, that those very positions cease to exist. So this would be a case of structural (downward) mobility, rather than circulation (downward) mobility if such terms can be used. For example the coming of polyester and other synthetic fabrics in India has drastically reduced the demand for cotton. Coupled with a fall in global demand for Indian staple cotton, many cotton farmers in India have had to face ruin. Some have turned to other crops, others to other occupations, and some have even committed suicide. With the coming of modem house held gadgets for example, traditional occupations such as the washing of clothes can employ so many people. BARRIERS TO MOBILITY THE MARXIST VIEW The Marxist view of stratification and mobility is based on the class nature of society. Marx said that as capitalism developed, there would be a tendency towards polarization. By this he meant that the stratification system would come to resemble a pyramid, with the masses of people bunched at the bottom.) Even the intermediate groups such as the petty bourgeoisie, small landowners and others would in course of time find themselves demoted. Thus if at all mobility was a feature of capitalism, it was downward, rather than upward.

Marxist writers have further developed the theme of proletarianization. Given the growth in service sector occupations, they have sought to see whether the lower rungs of white collar occupations can in fact be included into the proletariat, and have concluded that they can be. Therefore, from the Marxist perspective, the factors causing mobility are those that are basic to the system of capitalism, and furthermore, the opportunities for upward mobility are negligible, and the bulk of mobility is downward. SUBJECTIVE FACTORS- These are those factors that motivate people to be mobile i.e aspirations for upward mobility. Veblen's book, The Theory of the Leisure Class allows us to infer that every stratification system is automatically a source of mobility. This is because every individual's estimation of himself or herself is largely based on other's evaluation of them. And individuals will always seek to be well thought of in the eyes of their fellow men. Thus they will aspire to those positions which society deems to be worthwhile. The process of Sanskritization shows how it is in fact a commitment to the values of the caste system that is the source of aspiration for mobility. But as Beteille points out, while the upwardly aspiring groups wish to be included among the higher groups, once they arrive there, they try to retain their exclusivity. Thus in the case of the caste system both processes, those of inclusion and exclusion paradoxically coexist. Merton has also written about the importance of the reference group in determining social behavior. He states that the individual who seeks to be mobile has as a reference group a non membership group, rather than his own group. Thus the norms which be adopts are deviant so far as his own groups is concerned. This process he terms "anticipatory socialization". Those individuals who for a variety of reasons are at the periphery of their social groups may undergo such anticipatory socialization. Giddens criticizes conventional discussions of mobility which look at classes as fixed categories which can be populated by different people at different times. Schumpeter for example likens classes to buses, which have different passengers at different times. The problem here is two-fold. Firstly, one cannot separate a discussion of mobility from factors that structure class relations in general, and secondly, the very process of mobility from factors that structure class relations in general, and secondly, the very process of mobility can bring about changes in the system of stratification. Merton's work on social structure and anomie, sheds more light on this. He differentiates between socially accepted goals and means of achieving these goals. The goals refer to the values of society. Those who accept the goals and the means of achieving them are Conformists. But there may be those who-reject the goals, i.e. The values, as well as the means of achieving them. These people may either retreat from social life, Retreatism, or may rebel against society, Rebellion. In the latter case, they may, as referred to earliest, postulate a new structure of society, rather than seek advancement within the given structure.

When a discontent with the existing system leads to change of the system, this itself will throw up new positions and therefore mobility. Therefore it is difficult to clearly separate the objective and subjective factors into watertight compartments. CONSEQUENCES OF SOCIAL MOBILITY BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY OF CONSEQUENCES OF SOCIAL MOBILITY 'Consequences' as an aspect of social mobility was studied systematically for the first time by Pitirim A. Sorokin. He studied the effects of mobility from three dimensions viz. i. ii. iii. the ' 'demographic impact' of mobility on society, effects of mobility on 'human behavior and psychology', and mobility influencing 'processes and organizations' in a society.

He used the dichotomy between mobile and immobile societies, illustrated by taking examples randomly from historical and contemporary societies, to ground his theory of social and cultural mobility. Every society is ordered in a particular manner such that each individual or group is assigned particular tasks, which fulfill the functions of the social whole for its maintenance and perpetuation. It is in the context of each society these tasks or duties performed by the individuals living in it, are assigned high or low statuses or ranks according to the importance attached to the functions fulfilled by that task for the society as a whole. On the basis of performance of tasks, thereby, individuals and groups, are assigned higher or lower positions or ranked statuses in the society-i.e., stratification system in that particular society-known as classes (or castes in Indian society.) SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF MOBILITY i. ii. Embourgeoisement Heterogeneity of the Working Class- Unlike Marx's prediction of increasing homogeneity of working class with the progress of technology, some sociologists have seen a definite reversal of the trend. According to Ralf Dahrendorf, the working class has become increasingly heterogeneous or dissimilar. Due to changes in technology, complex machines are being introduced, which require well-trained and qualified workers to work on them, to maintain them and do repairs on them when necessary. Not just simple minders of machines of yesteryears but technically trained and hence highly skilled workmen are required. In various industries, workers can be divided into three distinct levels-unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled workers. This classification of workers is accompanied by differences in economic rewards (i.e., wages) and prestige accorded to each of them. Dahrendorf believes that in the twentieth century, due to mobility among workers, it has become meaningless to speak of working class, rather there has been a 'decomposition of labor' into various divisions as mentioned above. Many sociologists like K. Roberts, F.M. Martin and others have negated this aspect of heterogeneity of the working class as a consequence of

iii.

social mobility in the industrial societies of today, as enumerated above. Rather, they have suggested, through the findings of various researches, that the manual workers share similar market situation and similar life-chances. 'The workers are also aware of their shared class identity due to common class interests. Therefore, they can be distinguished from other classes in the society by their distinct sub-culture. The Enlarged and Fragmented Middle Classes- In the earlier days it usually comprised of the lowermost officials of the state, the petty tradesmen, or the exceptionally few peasants who owned a free plot of land. But in the nineteenth century, with the expansion of commercial interests of various nations and the State playing an increasingly active role in governance, led to a demand for educationally and technically qualified personnel who could be mobile geographically as well as aspirationally. Thus, the on-going process of expansion of the middle class since the mid-nineteenth century onwards has once again proved the fallacy of Marx's prediction that the middle strata would disappear (be proletaranized). Instead, Max Weber, A.Giddens, Frank Parkin etc. see the rise and expansion of the 'middle class', inherent in the very logic of industrial economy. Each has given a classification of classes. According to Weber, the white-collar middle class expands rather than contracts as capitalism develops, because the capitalist enterprises and the bureaucratic organization of modem nation state requires the services of large number of administrative staff. Secondly, 'the pretty bourgeoisie' i.e., the small property owners who due to competition from large capitalists take to white-collar professions. Anthony Giddens identifies three major classes in advanced capitalist society, of which the middle class is based on the possession of educational and technical qualifications.

Therefore from a study of 'images of class', Robets, Cook, Clarke and Semenoff came to the conclusion that the middle class Social Mobility is itself increasingly divided into a number of different strata, each with a distinctive view of its place in the stratification system. The diversity of class images, market situations, life chances and interest within the white-collar group suggests that the middle class is becoming increasingly fragmented (Kenneth Roberts). Rate of Social Mobility and Class Solidarity- Rate of Social mobility is the amount of movement from one strata to another in a particular society. In the contemporary society characterized by industrial economy, the rate of social mobility is considerably higher than the earlier societies. The reason behind this high rate of social mobility is the criteria of achievement based on merit, ability, talent, ambition and hard work, which determines a person position in the society. Class solidarity is the degree of cohesiveness of a particular class in the society. Therefore, the rate of social mobility has important consequences for class solidarity. According to many sociologists, the rate of social mobility is indirectly proportional to social solidarity. So for Anthony Giddens, if the rate of social mobility is low, most individuals will remain in their class of origin. This will lead to common life experiences over generations, formation of distinctive class subcultures, and aspirations to identify with the next higher class. Thus sounding a death knell for class solidarity.

Even.Marx believed that a high rate of social mobility would tend to weaken class solidarity. Classes would become increasingly heterogeneous as their members cease to share similar backgrounds. Therefore, for Marx, the potential for class consciousness and the intensity of class conflict would be considerably reduced. Whereas, according to Ralf- Dahrendorf, due to high rate of social mobility in the contemporary industrial societies, the nature of class conflict has changed. Since nowadays societies give primacy to the criteria of achievements, and he have become open, there is an increased competition among individuals of the same class for higher positions in the occupational reward structure. Therefore there is a reduction in class solidarity and intensity of class conflict. The Image of Social Order The effects of social mobility on social order has been the theme of many writers since Durkheim wrote about the concept of 'anomie', meaning, disruptive impact of unlimited aims and aspirations of people in a society unable to fulfill all these demands. Durkheim recognized that social mobility might have negative consequences, both for the society as well as the individual, in his classic study 'Suicide'. According to him, earlier societies maintained strict restraints on its stratification system such that an individual living in a particular society knew the legitimate limit of his aspirations. But when the stratification Consequences of Social Mobility system is no longer subjective to these restraints, bothsudden growth of power and wealth, and economic disasters lead to situations which are potentially disastrous for the moral order of the society. Therefore, not only during periods of upheavals, like that of economic depression (as there would be declassification) but also, during a rapid rise in fortune or power (as there would be no ceiling on ambitions) have dissociative impact on the social integration of a system, leading to suicides by individuals due to undermining of personal integration. Lipset, Bendix and Germani have emphasized that social mobility have different consequences in different social structures. Social mobility is more likely to be disruptive in its effects in traditional societies, which have an 'ascriptive' system of stratification, the high degree of status rigidity and hence inadequate preparation for mobility. This is based on the assumption that the constraints of 'class of origin' in a traditional society are very powerful and binding, and when once broken by social mobility, leave the individual isolated and anxious about his social status and identity. While in an 'industrial' society, marked by openness of its stratification system. Social mobility is a normal process favorable for the maintenance of the system. Even P.A. Sorokin, talking about 'Social and Cultural Mobility' (1927) too wrote about the disruptive consequences of social mobility. He believed that social mobility contributes to instability of the social order, cultural fluidity, diminishing solidarity. It may also lead to exhaustion of elite's and therefore decay of nations. According to Sorokin social mobility plays a vital role in diminishing intimacy, sensitivity, increases mental strain and accompanying diseases. Increase in isolation, loneliness, restlessness may lead to a hunt for transitory sensual pleasures, which further leads to disintegration of morals in the society. Sorokin also attempted to balance out the negative impact of social mobility by putting forward positive influences of social mobility for the society as well as the individual. In this

regard he talked about 'better and more adequate distribution of the individuals' such that the best men at the top reduce narrow-mindedness and occupationally hazardous idiosyncratic behavior; it facilitates economic prosperity and a rapid social progress, thereby enhancing the positive consequences of social mobility for the social order. Rapid social mobility leads to imbalance of institutions like family, kin groups, religion, political and educational institutions, which are now measured against the yardstick of income and wealth generation. This has effect on the changing definitions and parameters of these institutions now based solely on their utility value. Thus, seriously endangering the major functions traditionally performed by them. In addition, not only are the various social institutions being undermined by the encroaching impact of social mobility, even the human element in terms of the older generations, steeped in the customs and traditions of the bygone era, are looks upon with vituperative contempt by the new-mobile segments of the population. This has been proved by the mushrooming of 'old age homes' not only in the so-called advanced Western societies, but nowadays even in the more tolerant societies of the East. Hence, a society should aim to achieve a balance between tradition and modernity to offset the negative impact of rapid social mobility. The portrayal of social order engendered by rapid social mobility as given above is extremely pessimistic. For some thinkers like Peter M. Blau this pessimism in its extreme is unfounded. He tries to give reasons for the changing social order in the dilemma's of acculturation faced by the socially mobile. Blau argues that a socially mobile individual faces dilemma in choosing between the values, attitudes, behavior and friends of his class of origin, or the class of destination. It is this dilemma which leads to various observed consequences of social mobility like-social disintegration, insecurity or over conformity by the socially mobile individuals. Therefore, Blau has not really challenged the dissociative image of social order, but through his 'acculturation hypothesis' tried to assign reasons for social change engendered by social mobility. In contrast to the dismal picture of the social order portrayed by the exponents of 'dissociative hypothesis' (as explained above), Frank Parkin and C.J. Richardson in Britain, and H.L. Wilensky and H. Edwards in America examined class in capitalist society. Frank Parkin studying the effect of high rate of upward mobility, came to the conclusion that , it acted as a 'political safety-valve'. Upward mobility provides opportunities for the fulfillment of aspirations of individuals to reach higher status and pay. As a result, it prevents frustrations from developing, which in the absence of upward mobility if intensified might threaten the social fabric. On the other hand, H.L. Wilensky and H. Edwards examined the consequences of 'downward mobility'. According to them people who actually move down in social hierarchy from middle class to working class, usually do not accept their lowly position, and so do not adapt themselves to the norms values of the working class. They always aspire to regain their lost status. Hence, engendering conservatism in their outlook. Thus, C.J. Richardson's study of social mobility in Britain, concludes that neither upward social mobility, nor downward social mobility arouse feelings of relative deprivation or dissatisfaction with their present lot, or has may disruptive consequences for the social order. Hence, both upward and downward mobility tend to reinforce status quo.

POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES OF SOCIAL MOBILITY Generally it has been seen that, when the social class position of the order elite (or upper-class) is challenged by the emerging elite (usually referred to as 'nouveaux riches'), then all kinds of barriers are put forward to stop their incursion. This happens during periods of high occupational and consumption mobility. Even though the nouveaux riches would have acquired enough income, education, occupational rank and other criteria to enter the elite status, the older elites would invoke other traditionalistic criteria, ascriptive in character, like kinship, ethnic origin, table and bar manners etc., to deny them access to higher status and their associations. Thus it can be inferred that occupational mobility did not lead to social mobility. These actions of the order elites would make the newly-mobile aspirants lose faith in the fairness of the social process. Thus rejected, they would create alternate' symbols of status like various ethnic associations (e.g. Dalit Associations in India), political parties (e.g. Samajwadi party or the Rashtriya Janata Dal) residential sites (e.g. Arnbedkar Nagar) Colleges, schools, recreational facilities etc. This process would be further reflected in the voting behavior of both the older elite and the nouveaux riches. The older elites trying to consolidate and reinforcing their traditional aspects of culture would become extremely conservative in their political outlook. Therefore 'extreme rightism' is seen as a response to insecurity about social class position. While on the other hand, the newly-mobile aspirants would support any faction of political party which opposes the older elite. Thus the strains introduced by mobility aspirations will predispose individuals towards accepting more extreme political views. More often than not, social mobility gives rise of 'status discrepancy' such that mobility in one' sphere need not necessarily lead to mobility all the other spheres. For instance S.M. Lipset studying political behavior in the province of Saskatchewan (Canada) found that leaders of the Socialist Party were either businessmen or professionals. Though they belonged to high occupational and income category, yet they were considered low in the social hierarchy, as they were largely of non-Anglo Saxon origin. Whereas, the Liberal and Conservative Parties were dominated by the middle class. Though lower in income and occupational category, they belonged to higher social class, as they were from Anglo-Saxon origin, (they formed 90% of the population). Even when the higher status, 'upper class' Anglo-Saxon population did 'not economically exploit the non-Anglo-Saxon group, yet they felt socially deprived of the privileges, which usually accompany high occupational and income category. Thus the cleavage between the two groups was very sharp. In a similar vein, Robert Michels has analyzed European Socialism before the First World War. The Jews had come to occupy a prominent position in the European socialist movement, because, even when legally free, they were still discriminated against socially all over Eastern Europe and Germany. Even though they were economically rich, no corresponding social or political advantages were ensured by the prevailing system.

Thus discrepancy in status may lead to many permutation and combinations of social class statuses and their ideological alignments in the political sphere. Therefore one can see any of the following combinations actually operating depending upon the social, economic, statistical and political circumstances: i. Political orientation to the left, when a group's social class position is lower than its occupational or economic position, in spite of the fact under normal circumstances, the group would have conservative outlook. Political orientation to the left, when a social group's deprived position normally orients it to take radical position against the economically and socially dominant group. Political orientation to the right, when a group's social class position is higher than their occupational and economic position. Political orientation to the right, when for example, nouveaux riches are sometimes even more conservative than the older elite, as they seek to move up in the social hierarchy and be accepted by the order elite. Political orientation to the extreme right, when a group's higher social class position if felt to be threatened by the incursion of emerging mobiles. For instance, when the older elite close their ranks against the emerging nouveaux riches Political orientation to the left, when a group's old but declining upper class status makes it more liberal in its outlook.

ii. iii. iv.

v.

vi.

SOCIAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF SOCIAL MOBILITY Inequality being the hallmark of stratification system, distributes rewards and privileges differentially amongst its inhabitants. Chances of his being rejected are built into the system. Therefore, the people who do not reach their desired goals usually suffer from mental strain, evoked by their denial of selfworth. In many cases it may also lead to rejection of the 'self i.e., 'self-hatred'- acceptance of lower conception of self-worth. This according to Veblen, acts as a barrier to the possibility of self enhancement. This rejected image of self-worth is usually found in the individuals of lower-status minority groups, e.g. Jews. But, this self-hatred is difficult to maintain as self worth reasserts itself, and culminates into social action which may have ramifications for the society as a whole. The social consequences of a predominantly psychological phenomenon can usually be seen in the following three processes as put forward by S.M. Lipset and H.L Zetterbergi. Some people may reject the dominant values of the upper classes. In such cases, rejection may take the form of lower-class religious values which morally deny the values accorded to wealth and power. Secondly, another form of rejection of dominant values and assertion of self-worth could take the form of rebellious 'Robin Hood' bands, or formal revolutionary, or social reform movements. Finally, individuals may make efforts to improve their status through legitimate or illegitimate means.

ii.

iii.